This report is written for the construction company NCC and Uppsala University, with the goal to investigate if there is a simple method to compare building materials from the perspective of sustainability, to help the decision-making when choosing materials for building Projects. To test the method four facade systems (brick, ventilated plaster, unventilated plaster and cement board) have been analyzed with different tools used for sustainable assessement, namely: Life-cycle cost analysis, Life-cycle analysis and assessment criteria. To make a final assessment of the four facade systems and combine the results of the above mentioned tools, a multiple-criteria decision analysis was used. The result from the final assessment show that unventilated plaster facade is the most sustainable option, when analyzed from an assumed lifespan of 50 years. The results, however, are seen as questionable due to the fact that the criteriums and their weight to the final results are based on this report's author's estimation and may not represent an objective truth. Due to the lack of available data, many assumptions were required when utilizing the tools, which further diminished the credibility of the results. The conclusion is that there is no simple method to compare the sustainability of building materials that captures the entire spectrum of what sustainability consists of. Instead of trying to find a new method, the already established enviromental certificates should be used and further developed.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:uu-336727 |
| Date | January 2017 |
| Creators | Gille, Ragnar, Jämthagen, André |
| Publisher | Uppsala universitet, Byggteknik, Uppsala universitet, Byggteknik |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | Swedish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.002 seconds